Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

PAUDIA: Jurnal Penelitian dalam Bidang Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini accepts original research articles relevant to its Focus and Scope. The journal welcomes various research approaches, including quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, experimental and quasi-experimental research, research and development (R&D), and systematic literature reviews. Other scientifically sound approaches may also be considered, provided that the manuscripts meet the journal's editorial requirements and contribute to the advancement of knowledge and practice in early childhood education.

All submissions must present clear research objectives, appropriate methodologies, systematic analyses, and findings supported by relevant evidence. Manuscripts must demonstrate originality and align with the journal's Focus and Scope. PAUDIA does not accept community service manuscripts that primarily report outreach, training, workshops, mentoring, or similar activities rather than research. All submitted manuscripts undergo initial editorial evaluation and peer review in accordance with the journal's editorial policies. Meeting the methodological requirements alone does not guarantee that a manuscript will be considered within the journal's scope. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines.

Allegation of Research Misconduct

PAUDIA: Jurnal Penelitian dalam Bidang Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. Such misconduct may include fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, authorship misconduct, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and other serious violations of research ethics. Honest errors, differences in interpretation, or disagreements over research findings do not automatically constitute research misconduct.

Authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and other interested parties may report suspected misconduct to the editorial team through the journal's official contact channels. Each allegation will undergo an initial assessment based on the available evidence and relevant documentation. Where necessary, PAUDIA may request further information, invite the individuals concerned to respond, or cooperate with relevant research institutions, funders, or appropriate authorities. All allegations will be handled fairly and as confidentially as reasonably possible.

Depending on the findings, PAUDIA may reject a manuscript, request corrections or clarification, suspend editorial processing, publish a correction or expression of concern, retract a published article, or inform the relevant institution or authority when appropriate. Allegations will not be treated as established misconduct before the available evidence has been assessed. Concerns involving published articles will be addressed in accordance with the journal's Correction and Retraction Policy.

Complaints and Appeals

PAUDIA: Jurnal Penelitian dalam Bidang Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini is committed to handling complaints and appeals fairly, transparently, and appropriately. Authors, reviewers, readers, and other relevant parties may submit complaints concerning editorial procedures, publication practices, communication, or ethical conduct by contacting the editorial team at paudia@upgris.ac.id. Complaints will be assessed objectively, and where a complaint concerns a particular editor, the journal may arrange for another appropriate representative to review the matter.

Authors who disagree with an editorial decision may submit an appeal by email to paudia@upgris.ac.id, providing clear reasons and supporting arguments or evidence. Appeals may be considered when they identify potential factual errors, misunderstandings of the manuscript, or concerns regarding editorial procedures. The editorial team may seek additional input from another editor or an independent reviewer. Submitting an appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be changed.

Complaints involving suspected research misconduct or publication ethics violations will be handled in accordance with the journal's relevant policies. Complaints and appeals will be treated fairly and as confidentially as reasonably possible, and individuals raising concerns in good faith will not be subjected to retaliation. The editorial team will communicate the outcome to the relevant parties where appropriate.

Ethical Oversight

If the research work involves chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the association or legal organization.

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility: Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.
Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced
Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
Authorship and Contributorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editor

Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest. Complete Review Policy can be found here.
Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.